asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health if he has seen the county manager's statement of the circumstances touching his refusal to appoint, as clerk of works to Woodford water scheme, the person recommended by the consulting engineer; whether he can state that the discussion, stated to have been held in the county offices, took place, and if so, whether it was with his prior knowledge and consent; whether it is correct that, as the county manager's statement suggests, his chief engineering adviser participated in this discussion and agreed to and approved of the action of the manager in disregarding the terms of circular letter 50/34; whether the chief engineering adviser's suggested procedure was within the terms of the aforementioned circular letter, and, if not, if it was previously authorised by him; whether the county manager was empowered to confine the consultant's choice to one of two named applicants; and if he will state who is the authority for issuing regulations governing these appointments, and what are the main provisions of these regulations.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Woodford Water Scheme.
I have seen a Press report of a statement made by the county manager at a meeting of the Galway County Council recently.
I am informed that the chief engineering adviser of my Department did not participate in any formal discussion regarding the appointment of a clerk of works for the Woodford water supply scheme. The discussion, at which the chief engineering adviser was present, did not take place in the county council offices. I was not aware beforehand that any such discussion was to take place. The chief engineering adviser took the opportunity of explaining to the county manager and the consulting engineer the Department's view on the making of such appointments generally and the reasons underlying the procedure laid down in the Department's circulars. No departure from that procedure was recommended or approved by him.
All the applications were submitted in the first instance to the consulting engineer for his recommendation. It would appear that prior to making his selection no limitation was imposed on the consultant by the county manager. Subsequently, however, the consultant would appear, in deference to the opinions of the county engineer and county manager, to have withdrawn his first recommendation and to have agreed to recommend a candidate who was acceptable to them.
The appointment of a clerk of works is a matter in the first instance for the local authority. In order to ensure that responsibility for the selection of clerks of works should be given to the engineer or architect in charge of the works a procedure was formulated by my Department in 1934 and was set out in the circular letter referred to by the Deputy. This procedure has since been followed generally. It prescribes that applications shall be invited by advertisement; that they shall be submitted for examination to the engineer or architect responsible for the scheme, who shall submit a report to the local authority with his recommendation as to the person to be appointed. The local authority, that is to say in present circumstances the manager, shall then make the appointment in accordance with the recommendation subject to the Minister's sanction. The Minister for Local Government is the authority for issuing regulations or formulating procedure in matters of this kind. On the 17th ultimo I issued instructions to county managers that "when the recommendation of the consultant is received it should be formally referred to the county engineer to report whether he is aware of anything which would indicate that the candidate recommended by the consultant is unsuitable in any way for appointment. If the county engineer is not aware of any objection the candidate recommended should be appointed. The county engineer should not himself be asked to recommend a candidate".
Will the Minister say if the consultant changed his original recommendation of his own volition and without pressure from anybody and, further, will he say if the new regulations will apply to this particular appointment?
I have already pointed out that it would appear that the consultant, in deference to the opinions of the county engineer and county manager, withdrew his first recommendation and agreed to recommend a candidate who was acceptable to them. I am not able to say whether the withdrawal was made as a result of actual pressure brought to bear upon the consultant to depart from his first recommendation or not. With regard to the second supplementary, I shall have to consider whether these regulations would apply to the appointment now under discussion.